statement to read first. Welcome to the February 2026 meeting of the Alachua County Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Hearing. The purpose of this hearing is to hear alleged code violations filed by various departments of Alachua County, Florida. The Code Enforcement Special Magistrate was established by Florida Statutes Chapter 162 and Alachua County Ordinances to obtain compliance with various county ordinances and regulations. I have no authority to change the ordinances or any of the regulations we will be addressing today. That can only be done by the Alachua County Board of County Commissioners. I can determine if a violation has occurred, set a date for full compliance, and levy a fine for non-compliance. My decisions can only be appealed to the courts and not to the Board of County Commissioners. The procedure we'll follow today is the secretary will call the case, county staff will present its case, the respondent shall have the opportunity to present its defense to the case, I will make a decision at a future date and the respondent will be notified by mail of that decision. All persons testifying today will do so under oath or by swearing or affirming that they will tell the truth. Any evidence in the form of documents or photographs must be submitted to the clerk for inclusion in the record. If you have a cell phone, please silence it or turn it off so it doesn't interrupt the proceedings. Anybody who's intending to testify today, please stand. Anybody who intends to testify, that includes staff and respondents. Raise your right hand and Gina will swear you in. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give in these cases today will be the truth and the whole truth? Okay, thank you. You may be seated. All right, we'll call the first case, which is I believe number nine because we have a conflict there. Actually, it's number six. It would be H&M Nationwide Investment, LLC. Okay, that's number nine on here. Okay, go ahead. So is there someone here representing H&M Nationwide Investment, LLC? Someone here representing the respondent. Please proceed, County. Good morning. In case number 25-012856, County received a complaint that property was being cleared at parcel number 10866-100-011 in Alachua County, Florida on December 9th, 2025. I went and visited the site and found that the site had been cleared without a tree permit or a pass. Can I get to you and just identify yourself for the record? Oh, I'm sorry. That's okay. Andrew Caniglio, the senior forester. Thank you. Appreciate that. Go ahead. So I went out there and determined there was no pre-application screening done on the property and or a tree removal permit was not applied for. So I sent a violation, notice of violation. And so far, I have not had any contact with the property owner, violator. I have good service with certified mail or posting. And that's about it. Okay, so what are you recommending in terms of the corrective action would be to obtain and submit, obtain, and complete a tree after the factory removal permit. And we have $140 in prosecution costs and we would recommend 15 days to come into compliance or $50 a day if they do not. All right. Again, is there someone here representing the respondent? Seeing none. Okay. Thank you. We're back onto our regular schedule now, I believe, Gina. Case number 25-011868, Alachua County versus Gent and Gent and Gent and Gent et al. Is there someone here representing the respondent? Gent, Gent, Gent, Gent, Gent? No. Nobody here? All right. So County, please proceed. Morning. Michael Williams, code officer, Alachua County. In code enforcement case 25-011868, the county received a complaint on 11-4-2025 regarding the property located at 2405 Northeast 70th Street in Gainesville, Alachua County. The parcel is identified by number 17743-019000. The owner of the property is Gent and Gent and... General. Right. Yeah. General. There we go. Thank you. Code administration initiated an enforcement proceeding and found there to be a violation of the following sections of Alachua County Code of Ordinances, 74.20A, accumulation of junk. The respondent was provided a reasonable time to correct the violations. A courtesy notice was sent initially to the respondent with corrective action. Subsequently, a notice of violation, notice of hearing was sent to the respondent that also included corrective actions. My last inspection of the property was on January 27, 2026. It was also noted that the property remains in violation of code section 74.20A, accumulations of junk and storage. I have good service of notices and statements of violation to respond that's sent by certified mail or posting. Copies have been provided to the magistrate and I request that they be entered into evidence. I have had no contact with the respondent regarding the violations of the property. The photographs being presented were taken by myself and accurately reflect the violations and I ask that they be admitted into evidence. They'll be admitted. Okay. Thank you. The county's recommendation is that a respondent be given an additional 15 days in order to come into compliance. If compliance is not achieved in 15 days, then a fine of $100 per day be imposed. Additionally, the county has incurred $280 in costs in bringing this case to hearing. This is a vacant lot. They cut it, which was very nice because it was somewhat overgrown. Right. And so subsequently, it looks like all of the matters that were there, all of the debris and trash and so forth, was left there. So they must have picked all that up before they mowed and then put it in the pile. Right. Exactly. And so actually, it looks like people in the neighborhood are now, you know, starting to kind of... Sure. Because once it's there, it attracts people to... Absolutely. Understood. Okay. Yeah. All right. And again, no contact with the owner. No contact whatsoever. Okay. All right. Thank you. That'll conclude that case. Please call the next one, Gina. Case number 25-012493, Alachua County versus Hickson-Karen-D. Michael Williams. How about what happened to number two? It was switched. The repeat violation? Oh, I'm sorry. I skipped over it. 25-011110, Alachua County, Garvey, Jacqueline M. Trustee. Is there someone here representing Jacqueline M.? So you're there. Okay. So we're going to let the county present its case, and then I'll let you all speak to that. Okay. So go ahead, County, and please proceed. Michael Williams, Code Enforcement Officer, Alachua County. In Code Enforcement Case 25-011110, the county received a complaint on 10-20-25 regarding the property located at 7607 Northwest 42nd Avenue in Gainesville, Florida. The parcel is identified with number 06040-010017. The owner of the property is Garvey, Jacqueline M. Trustee. Code Administration initiated an enforcement proceeding and found there to be a violation of the following sections of Alachua County Code of Ordinance at 74.36a nuisance overgrowth. Due to the fact that this case is a repeat violator of Code Section 74.36 nuisance overgrowth, which was previously adjudicated on 03-17-2025. Upon receiving the most recent complaint on 10-20-25 regarding nuisance overgrowth, another notice of violation notice of hearing was sent to the respondent that also included corrective actions. My last inspection of the property was on 2-226. It was noted that the property remains in violation of Code Section 74.36a nuisance overgrowth. What I noted remains in violation in the rear of the property. It does appear that there's overgrowth. In some sections, it looks like it could be 4-5 feet. On the side of one side of the property, more specifically, the east side of the property, it remains overgrowth. It's at least over 18 inches. The front presents with, it looks like there's some effort that has gone into cutting the front. But I'm really unsure because I don't know if, you know, if the cold weather killed it or if someone did, in fact, make some effort. But I, you know, but I will give them credit that it... So the front's in compliance, but it'd be the sides and the back? Yes, exactly. So it's okay. So they know exactly what happened to be done. Okay. Okay. I have good service of notices and statement of violation to the respondent sent by certified mail or posting. Copies have been provided to the magistrate, and I request that they be entered into evidence. They'll be entered. I have had contact with the respondent regarding the violations of the property. She... The respondent basically did indicate that she was either going to make some effort or that this was a certified Florida property. Florida-friendly. Right. Okay. And so even if that is the case, I don't believe that designation would supersede the county's ordinance, you know, that landscaping has to be kept at a certain level in terms of the height of the overgrowth. The photographs being presented were taken by myself and accurately reflect the violations, and I ask that they be admitted into evidence. They'll be admitted. Okay. The county's recommendation is that the respondent be given an additional 30 days in order to come into compliance. If compliance is not achieved in 30 days, then a fine of $50 per day be imposed. The county has incurred $210 in cost in bringing this case to hearing. Okay. Anything else, Mr. Reilly? No, that's... Okay. It's your opportunity to speak. If you go up to the podium, please. You can give her some assistance there, I think. So if you can identify yourself and also tell us what your relationship to the property is. Okay. I'm Jacqueline Garvey, and I own it. This is my friend, Larson McLeod, and he is going to do most of the talking for me. But my house is, it's not overgrowth, it's flowers, and then they are there, and it's not garbage. And they are feeding, right now, they are feeding the birds, and they are feeding small animals. They're sheltering small animals, and they are also harboring our pollinators for the next season. And my house has blooms all four seasons for this reason. Okay. And it's for the bees and the pollinators. I'll let you talk. You can stay. I see. I mean, if you can identify yourself for the record. Good morning. My name is Larson McBride. As Ms. Garvey said, I am a close friend and associate. I'm also a professional scientist and ISA certified arborist. I've been named to the City of Gainesville's Tree Advisory Board by the City Commission, and also to the Land Conservation Board by the Board of County Commissioners here. So this is all to say that I consider myself to be a subject matter expert on Florida-friendly yards and native landscaping beneficial to urban wildlife and ecology. I'd like to enter my own photographs for evidence. Is that possible? Sure. That's fine. Absolutely. And I can show them on the overhead here if you can give them to them and just tell them which ones you want. Yeah. If you want them into evidence, we're going to have to get a copy that can be entered. So if you can e-mail them to them, that would be done. But go ahead and – no, go ahead. It might be easier if you let him testify from there. I don't know how well this is going to work. That's all right, Your Honor. I'll e-mail them to code, and then we can enter them into – So let me ask you, has the owner made any effort to get – because there is a Florida-friendly program, and the county has had broad actions here before. Or has anybody come to the property and determined whether it meets the criteria or not? Yes. And we've also made effort to demonstrate that the type of landscaping that Ms. Garvey wants is intentional. Okay. As you can see, we have – we understand the importance of the ordinance and obviously respect it. But as you can see, Ms. Garvey is not an absentee homeowner or a negligent landlord or somebody who is otherwise kind of a derelict property owner. And just – I'd like to anecdotally describe that the photos that COTA submitted for evidence, they do demonstrate that there's vegetative growth greater than 18 inches. But this is along the fence line and setbacks. It doesn't comprise the entire backyard. And the photos that I'll submit demonstrate that there are intentional paths and the vegetation that the photos indicate are shrubs. They're rose bushes and beautyberry bushes. And, yes, they're higher than 18 inches. But, you know, it is permissible to have some vegetation that's above 18 inches. I mean, so many of us have trees in our yard, which are obviously higher than 18 inches high. And in addition to this, you know, my friend is on a fixed income, disabled, works when she can, but otherwise is at home. This – the vegetation in her yard and the wildlife that it attracts is important to her quality of life. And I work with her to ensure that this is, you know, an intentional, attractive, and, you know, otherwise, you know, intentional landscape. And so this is something that we don't believe is in violation of the ordinance. But we do want to know what we can continue to do to avoid being cited because, you know, as code has indicated, this isn't the first time that she has been cited. But there has been efforts to be in compliance, and yet the citations continue. And so we want to know what we can do to avoid any continued. Do you know, is there a homeowners association here? No. Okay. I just want to make sure from background that there's not a homeowners because we've had other issues with homeowners associations. Yeah. So my suggestion is, and I'm going to withhold judgment on this case, would be have the county come out from the friendly side and look at the property and identify. Because clearly, beautyberry and shrubs and stuff are permitted because you can put landscaping in. But the question is, what are the other, and roses, obviously, as well. But I think it would behoove the county to come back out with a person who knows rural or friendly, and let's identify what can stay. And if there is something that needs to be taken out to come into compliance. Does the county have any objection to that, having somebody from Florida friendly come out? No, actually, I think that's an excellent plan. Because otherwise, there's a complaint here, and my concern is if we can identify that, in fact, it meets the Florida friendly, then that complaint person can be informed that, no, this meets the criteria, and then hopefully the complaints will stop at that point. For sure. So, yeah, so I'm going to give 60 days and then ask the county to have somebody come out, and then if they determine, you know, that it's not, it can be withdrawn at that point if the county is comfortable with that. Okay. Very good, thank you. Are you comfortable with that as well? Yes. Are you comfortable with that? That's fine. Okay, so what will happen is the county, I'm going to give 60 days. If, you know, for some reason they can't get you in agreement with what is there, then it will come back before me and we can address it then. But otherwise, if the county determines that, in fact, it does meet Florida friendly or there's some minor adjustments that have been made and they're done, then you won't be back here. Okay. And until that time, if complaints continue to come in, can we kind of get a, catch a break on those? Right, yes. Oh, no, no, that's what's clear here is, I mean, if it's a complaint. So, yeah, so it's being determined at that point, so they'll be told that, you know, it's being considered by the county. Yeah, thank you for coming and bringing the information to my attention and to the courts. Thank you. All right, you're free to go. Now I believe we can go on to case number four. Case number 25-0129, excuse me, 2493, Alachua County versus Hickson, Karen D. Is Karen Hickson here? Someone representing Karen Hickson here. Thank you for coming. I believe you're back up. Okay, thank you. Michael Williams, Code Enforcement Officer, Alachua County. In Code Enforcement Case 25-012493, the county received a complaint on 11-24-25 regarding the property located at 1927 Northwest 56 Terrace, Gainesville, Florida. In Alachua County, the parcel identifies as 06353-152-001. The owner of the property is Karen D. Hickson. Code Administration initiated an enforcement proceeding and found there to be a violation of the following sections of Alachua County Code of Ordinances, 74.36A, nuisance overgrowth, 74.20A, accumulation of junk. Due to the fact that this case is a repeat violation of Code Section 74.36A, nuisance overgrowth, and Code Section 74.20A, accumulation of junk, which was previously adjudicated on 1-9-20-25, upon receiving the most recent complaint on 11-24-25 regarding nuisance overgrowth and accumulation of junk, another notice of violation notice of hearing was sent to the respondent that also included corrective actions. My last inspection of the property was on January 27, 2026. It was also noted that the property had complied with Code Section 74.36A, nuisance overgrowth, and Code Section 74.20A, accumulation of junk. I have good service of notice and statements of violation to the respondent sent by certified mail or posting. Copies have been provided to the magistrate, and I request that they be entered into evidence. They'll be entered. Okay, thank you. I have had contact with the respondent regarding the violations at the property. The photographs being presented were taken by myself and accurately reflect the violations, and I ask that they be admitted into evidence. The county is just merely asking for the cost in bringing this matter to hearing due to the fact that the respondent has some ongoing health issues as well as some financial issues that they provided to us, and so therefore the county is only seeking cost, which is $210. Okay, just for a record, because it's a repeat violation under the county ordinances, the violation starts on the day of observance, and once it's in compliance, there's automatic penalties. Is the county asking not to have those automatically put in place? Yes. I see Scott shaking his head over there. All right. So that's fine. Okay. I just want to make that clear because I want people to understand that with a repeat violation, the penalties start the day of observance, and there is no time given to correct, and then once they come into compliance, the penalties stop. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate you doing that for the owner based on their circumstances. Again, I presume that's why she can't be here. So, again, somebody representing Karen Hickson here. Okay. Thank you for your presentation. Next case. Case number 25-000676, Alachua County versus Farron Keith W. Is Keith Farron here? Okay. So, if you want to go over to where the podium is, I'll have you speak once the county presents its case. Morning. Gerald with Code Officer for Electra County. In enforcement case 25-000676, the county received a complaint on 2526 regarding the property located at address 12104 Southwest 143rd Street in Electra County, Florida, and identified by Parcel 0474-724-001-000. The owner of the property is Keith Farron. Code Administration initiated a code enforcement proceeding and found there to be a violation of the following sections with the Electric County Code of Audiences. Section 404.18, operating a kennel, more than 20 animals that has not been approved by the Developmental Review Committee, DRC. The respondent was provided with a reasonable time to correct the violations. A notice of violations was sent to the respondent that included corrective actions. Ongoing inspections conducted to this date have determined that the respondent remains in violation of the said Electra County Code sections. My last inspection of the property was on 2-19-25. I have good service of notice and statement of violations to respondent sent by certified mail receipt or posting. Copies have been provided to the magistrate, and I request they be entered into evidence. Okay, so your last inspection was in February of 25? Yes, it's been a minute. We went back and forth quite a few times, phone calls. When I first came out, he was supposed to sell the property. He didn't sell it. We didn't have the best interactions, and at the time it was considered, it's probably not returned to the property. My first interaction with him, he was sort of aggressive, so we decided not to go back then. But we've had quite a few conversations with him. Okay. And then it was held off because he went through growth management trying to take care of something. And so several courtesy notices were sent to extend time, so it's been a minute before I went back out there. Okay. All right. Your opportunity to speak. Yes, sir. Can you identify yourself and your relationship to him? Yes, sir. My name is Elaine Ray Mullen. Keith Farron owns the property, and I own the LLC and the previous nonprofit for the dogs. Mm-hmm. Keith is not here today because, as Mr. Sapp has said, he doesn't present himself well. So we thought it would be in the best interest that I represent. Okay. So you were responsible for the dogs on the property. Yes, sir. Okay. Which is the issue that we had before us. Yes, sir. So originally, two years ago, we began a nonprofit during an emergency situation and had over 80 dogs at the time for a very short period of time. We placed all of the rescues, and we now currently have our own personal, or my personal, I should say, show dogs and breeding program. So, once we had a complaint, Mr. Sapp and county commissioners, I believe, came out to the property. We had wonderful conversations with them, besides Keith, which I apologize for. No problem. He does change his mind often, and I have minimal control over what Keith does. Currently, we have listed the property, or he has listed the property, and we have an agreement with a realtor. So it is listed. Initially, our hope was to do a special exception, but the cost on that is over $58,000, and we could not afford that. So it is for sale, and it is listed. Right now, we're just cleaning up branches, limbs, taking down chicken coops, condensing things, and then looking into what permits, if any, that are needed to demolish or take down some of the buildings. There was also a building permit issue on the property, where zoning was going back and forth with the building permit people, and said that one wouldn't be okayed without the other one. So I think we've gotten past that loophole. The intention now is to take down the buildings without building permits that he did not get when he should have. Okay. Well, that's not before us today. Okay, sorry. What's the day as a dog? So how many dogs are still on the property? Well, originally, we were down, and that's kind of confusing, because it was told that we had to be under 20, and then we were told we had to be under 10, and I couldn't mind. Let me ask you, Ms. Verstapp, what is the number that she has to be down? What does the code say? 444, you know, and if she says 20. When I went out there, they had about 40 dogs or more. Well, this is a year over a year ago. Yeah, a year ago. They said they had gotten it down, but the cold states, part of the cold states, 20 animals. Okay, so it is 20. So we did have a couple of appointments to have Mr. Sapp back out to the property, and we were under 20 dogs, only because we were paying boarding on an additional eight. After I had conversations, they said, hey, if you're putting the property up for sale, it's fine. We don't, at this point, just go forward. So I brought the dogs back onto the property. So currently, right now, I believe we have, without counting six months or younger, I think we have 28 or 29 on the property right now. Yeah, the problem with the sale of the property is that that could take very little time or a long time. Agreed. We have reduced our dog numbers significantly, and regularly, we have six more leaving. These dogs are not just dogs. Understood. They're my family. Mm-hmm. And I'm a very ethical breeder, and I can't just find homes for them. I have to interview people and make sure that they can take care of them. It's okay. But I am doing it. So let me ask you, how long do you think it would be for you to get it below 20? If I needed to get below 20 tomorrow, I could place them with friends and pay boarding on them again. But I'm one more reasonable. I mean, but, you know, when could you get that down to below 20, reasonably? You said you have six leaving. I have six leaving this coming week. I'm taking a trip to drop them off, yes. Okay, so that'll bring you down to 22 or 23. 23. So the question is. Maybe another 30 days. Two of them are problematic because they're still rescues. Okay. But another 30 days or more would be very appreciated. Okay, let me ask the county. Hi, good morning. I just need to clarify a little bit what the code requires. I'm Holly Banner, Zoning Administrator. Section 404.18 has two tiers of threshold determining the type of approval that's required. So what establishes a kennel by definition is anything with 10 animals or more. Then the threshold. So that threshold, anything above 10 is a kennel that requires development plan approval through the Development Review Committee. Then if you have 20 or more, then you also have to go to the county commission to obtain a special exception. Okay. So anything over 10 still does require zoning approval. It's just that it does not require the special exception with the Board of County Commissioners. Okay. And under 10 would not require? Under 10 would not be determined to be a kennel. Okay. All right, so it looks like 10 is the number that you need to understand. Okay, that's very confusing because it says 20 everywhere, and I could never find that particular listing. Okay, so that changes things. So. Well, in that sense, yes, that's in the email that was provided to the. Okay. Yeah, I don't get emails. I'm sorry. That's okay. Well, what we need to make sure is that you're added to the email list because you own the dogs, I presume, and he does not. Yeah, well, we're splitting anyway, so he can do what he wants with his property. I'm just trying to get through this. Understood. Okay. Yeah, so what's the county's position on additional time for her to bring the dogs down below? Yeah, we've been working with them for over a year. So, you know, I had recommended 60 days and a fine of 50 after compliance days. If they didn't component of compliance. Yes, because they've been trying to sell the property from the beginning, and that was one of the first things, deal. So it's been quite a bit of back and forth. You know, I do understand how you feel in reference to your dogs. I have no problem extending the time. So would you feel comfortable with 90 days? Yeah, it's not a problem. Okay, so we'd give you 90 days. Hopefully you've sold the property within that time frame. I don't care what he does. He just needs to give me money so I can get out of here. Yeah, so 90 days we'd give you. And then please stay in touch. Do you not do email, or are you just? No, I have email. Okay, so please stay in touch with Mr. Sapp. Yes, please email me. Keith doesn't give me any information. Well, can you give her a card today? Yeah, yeah. You got her email? Okay, so yeah. So, well, we'll work with you on this and hopefully get you past this. Thank you. I appreciate you coming. You can see, Saul, some people don't bother even show up. So I really appreciate you coming. Okay, so let me get some notes here. Okay, all right. Let's go ahead to the next case, please. I believe we're now in the penalty. Is that right? So we're in the penalty hearing phase now. Case number 25. Oh, go ahead. Go ahead. Case number 25-008034, Alachua County versus McMinn, Joel Trustee Kelly. All right. Is someone here representing Joel McMinn? Somebody here representing Joel McMinn? Okay, not present. Good morning. Good morning. Case 2-5-0-0-8-0-3-4, McMinn, Joel Trustee. Guilty, not in compliance. Prosecution cost is $420. Daily fine, $75 a day. Total fine is $6,570. And I have a photo for the case file, Your Honor. I was there on the 4th. Okay. Okay, so the county is asking for placement of a lien. Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. Okay. The non-president of the county will be awarded a lien on this. Okay. Please call the next case. Case number 25-005253, Alachua County versus Hathcock and Robinson. Is Hathcock and Robinson here or somebody representing them? Seeing none. Not present. County, please proceed. Okay. Michael Williams, Alachua County Code, with regard to case 25-005253, guilty, not in compliance, prosecution costs of $280, daily fine of $50, total fines of $4,030. Upon my last inspection, it was noted that there was basically, you know, partial compliance counts as remaining in violation. There was an RV on the property that was removed in its entirety. Okay. But all of the trash and debris and so forth still remain on the property. Okay. So, again, county is asking for lien and continuation of fines? Yes. Okay. So, it will be granted. All right. Next case, please, Gina. Case number 24-014113, Alachua County versus Alonzo Barato Gregorio. So, is someone here representing Alonzo Bartolo Gregorio? Seeing none. County, please proceed. Yeah. General Sapp, Code Administration. He's found guilty but in compliance. So, I just have the prosecution of $350, no ongoing fines, total fines of $350. Okay. All right. So, asking for lien for the prosecution costs. Okay. All right. Be granted. Next case, please. Case number 25-007451, Alachua County versus Yeadon and Yeadon. Someone representing Yeadon and Yeadon here. Someone representing Yeadon and Yeadon. Not present. Okay. Please proceed. Okay. Michael Williams, Alachua County Code. With regard to case number 25-007451, guilty. However, they are in compliance. Prosecution cost of $210. The property is complied. However, the county is seeking the 210 in prosecution costs. Okay. All right. Lien will be granted. I see our last case here. Please go ahead. Case number 25-000170, Alachua County versus Perkins and Perkins. So, someone here representing Perkins and Perkins. You want to have, go over to the podium over there where you can do testimony. And are you attorney, sir? Yes. Okay. So, you obviously won't. So, let the county present its case and then let you speak. Go ahead. Office for Poirier with Code Administration. Case 25-000170, Perkins and Perkins. Guilty, not in compliance. Prosecution cost is $350. Daily fine, $125 a day. Total fine is $22,475. Okay. All right. So, the last inspection, so they're still not in compliance? Correct, Your Honor. This morning? Okay. All righty. Your opportunity to speak. And please identify yourself for the record. Yes. Niles Witten. I am representing Ms. Perkins, who is president to my left. Okay. And actually, she's going to be doing a little bit of speaking as to steps she has been attempting to take and per circumstances, if that's okay. Okay. Now, what you really understand is that my position here at this, what I have authority to do, is either determine, you know, whether a lien is going to be a place because of failure to maintain compliance. So, she can speak, but if it's still not in compliance, you know, unless she has testimony that it's now in compliance, I don't have any... She's not going to be able to testify that it's now in compliance. She is taking steps. It is slower going. She does have medical and cash flow concerns that have been an obstacle. Okay. So, I don't know if you're aware, but there is a provision that, you know, once you are in compliance, you can come back and ask for me to reduce fines based on medical or financial reasons. And we do that on a regular basis. So, I just want to make sure that she's aware of that as well. She has an opportunity to come back once things are in compliance and everything has stopped. And at that point, we can look at reducing the fines. Well, I was aware. I hadn't actually had a sit-down with her about that yet. Okay. But I just wanted to make her aware of that as well. Thank you. So, if you want her to speak, please do. Do you just... Would you like to say anything about what you have been doing to try to get this taken care of? Yes. I called the pool people to come out and look, and they said that it's never going to pass inspection because it needs two drains. And they said it would cost like $4,000 or something, but we just want to fill it in. And then I called Tom Sherry was the code enforcement guy. I got a list of all the general people that would come out, and I sent them pictures of the cottage that needs to have an after-the-fact permit. And I've been there 26 years, and I was divorced three years ago, and my husband, he used to do construction, and he used to repair everything. But they said that I would need a solid septic tank in there. And my mom, I've been taking care of her for six months. She's 90 years old and has stage 3 colon cancer, and she can't get up easy. And I'm not able to work, plus I'm disabled myself. But, yeah, I only get 602 from SSI, I mean, Social Security. Yeah. All those factors will be taken into consideration. Yeah, my brother, he's got money, and he wants me to try to keep the place, because my daughter passed away, and we put a big memorial in our backyard for her. Mm-hmm. And my mom taught both my daughters how to swim in that pool, unless it would be good for her to swim in, so I bet I just can't get a new pool. Right. Understood. But my brother, his wife is a real estate person, and I was thinking of selling it, but with all the stuff that needs to be fixed, I don't think we get much money, so. Well, you can probably sell it, but maybe not what you need to get. Right. Yeah, understood. Now, Ms. Perkins, had you taken any steps related to the electrical system hazards? Yes, I had a wind stream came out, and they knocked the electrical cord out, and I had them come out, and they said, that's high voltage, we don't handle that. So, I had an estimate of 22,500 for them to come bury the line, and I just didn't have it at the time. Okay, so you say wind stream actually knocked it out? Yeah, they put in a box for the cottage, and they knocked it out. Well, it's sticking out of the ground, but I had paid a guide after hours, $100 to come get it working, but I don't have $2,500 to get the, they left the cable above the ground, I don't know why, when we had our electrical fixed. So, it sounds to me, since you have a turn, I'd be talking to wind stream if they are, or Connecticut's are now now for damage. I did, I had them come out, and he said, it's high voltage, they don't handle it. Well, the problem is, if they cause the problem, though, they still have an issue, whether it's high voltage or not. But, I would look to your attorney to see if there's an opportunity there on you in that. So, you are trying to do things, and I understand you're financially limited, so. Yeah, I mean, I called all the people on the list that Tom Sherry gave me, and they were like retired, and I showed them pictures, and they said, because it's got a metal paneling, they said that they don't come out for that kind of stuff. Okay. I called all the ones on the list. All right. Do you have anything else, counsel? I think this, what are we called? What kind of body are we? This is a special magistrate hearing? Well, I think the special magistrate has heard everything. I think that would be useful, considering the nature of this hearing as you express it. Yeah, and my authority is limited in terms of what I can do as a special magistrate, basically, at this position, because she's still not in compliance. Yeah, and that's understandable. Yeah, so, but, again, we have that mechanism, and all the things she's described would be factors for reducing the falling, down to a very, either zero or a very small number, potentially, so. But the biggest thing is, my concern is to make sure that there isn't some kind of a hazard there. I'm concerned about this high voltage line, that somehow somebody could come into contact or have a problem with that. Exactly. That would be my biggest concern. I did put a fence along the pool, but they said that it's not proper. Anything else from the county? Yes, Your Honor. I just wanted to state a couple things. There's different items on the property. So, she has a shed, and that needs to be removed, so that was not granted to be there. She can continue with the A-frame and the pool, as she stated. She did go through pre-application screening, which was approved. She did her online permits for the A-frame and the tiny home, plus the pool. So, they actually need to be paid, so she applied, but she never received it because she didn't pay for the permits. Okay. As far as the electrical, it is actually unsafe. So, the electrical panel, which is outside, the cover is not on there, so all the wires are exposed. Are you talking about... Right in front of your property, ma'am, to the left-hand side. So, you have that electrical panel that's outside. You mean by the pool? No. This is actually the main panel for the house. The front on the right. Yes, ma'am. Well, this panel is located outside, so it's the main panel running to the house. It's not your service, your feed. This is actually the main panel. So, the cover is removed from that, so all the wires are exposed. The main wires leading into the house, those are located on the ground, as she stated. Right. Those actually need to be buried instead of put on top of the ground. Or be elevated. Correct. And as far as the pool, they did run wires near the pool. So, there's a step up to lead to the pool, and there's wires right underneath that step up, which is next to water that's actually unsafe. We put the power off for that. Okay. That's good. Okay. I would suggest that she contact the building department again. I mean, if you put fencing up to hide that electrical that's unsafe, that's located on top of the ground, then we can go out and take a look. So, at least we know that you're safe, because those items are definitely unsafe. But that electrical to the tiny house was cut off, and nobody's living in there. Okay. Then that's good. Okay. Yeah. So, my question is, is the cover for the panel there? It's just not on? I haven't looked at the box. You're talking about on the pole? Correct, ma'am. On the outside pole. I haven't looked, so I'll have to check in. That should be a relatively simple fix, because it's usually two to four screws that hold the camp panel on. It's even there. Yeah. That's why I asked you, was it there? Yeah. The last time we were there, it wasn't there. Okay. So, that was installed without permits, and they did a really bad job. Right. So, that needs to be safe. But the county's recommendation would be that a lien be placed, and then she can come back before you for a reduction after, because she does qualify for a reduction. Yeah. There's no doubt about that. Sorry. Yes, Your Honor. Okay. Anything else from you, Counsel? No, Magistrate. This has been very informative. Okay. So, I would say, from a safety perspective, I don't think getting a panel cover put on would be very expensive, because those panels are very common. Lots of electrical companies have leftover parts and pieces from when they were, so it wouldn't take much. And I'm just thinking from a safety point of view, somebody coming up there and messing with that. If it's live, that would be my only concern from a safety perspective, and for your safety as well, too. Okay. Okay? And I'll contact the building department to let them know that you put up fencing. They might want to go take a look, just for safety. Okay. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you for coming. Thank you. Appreciate you being here. Thank you. All right. Anything else from the county on cases or anything? And our reduction was removed. Thank you. All right. I'm going to conclude this hearing at 9.48.